If NRx now consolidates its Moldbuggian lineage, and its distinction from ENR-style ethno-populism, the new regime will have proved itself worthy of default support. MA, whatever the merits of his strictly theoretical contribution, was truly disastrous in these two respects.

This blog is going to treat the disappearance of any reference to Evola (as in any way relevant to the NRx main current) as one critical index of a return to the right track.

Would it be mean spirited to mention that NRx needs more philosophical and practical substance rather than more squabbling about ‘leaders’? A single article by Moldbug on any topic (poems included) would instantly render said leadership irrelevant anyway.

I have a comment regarding the ‘short argument for tradition’, and since you can’t comment on the OP I thought I’d do so here.

‘Note that the negation of #3 is not a simple “humans are naturally good at cultural design”, but includes all statements that contradict the premise as given’ – this sounds odd to me. The negation of a statement does not generally include (at least if we take that to mean ‘entail’) everything which contradicts it. E.g. the negation of ‘This is blue all over’ does not imply ‘This is red all over’, even though the second statement contradicts the first. Or to take a different sort of example, the negation of ‘I am happy’ does not imply ‘I am not happy and I never will be’, even though the second statement contradicts the first.

I read him as meaning the argumentative negation rather than the logical negation; the set of things one might claim when attempting to rebut #3. When Warg argues “humans generally are bad at…” and reasons from there, you don’t have to counter with “humans generally are good at…”, it’s sufficient to counter with narrower contradictory assertions such “in this specific situation, humans are good at…” or “it is possible to teach a few humans to be good at…” thereby undermining the chain of reasoning.

To use your color analogy, “this is blue all over” is contradicted both by “this has a red spot, but is otherwise blue” and by “this is red all over”. Either of those statements can be used to negate an argument which depends on “this is blue all over”.

What I mean, is that if you don’t accept a statement, you don’t have to accept its opposite. You may actually accept a merely slight modification.

>The negation of a statement does not generally include (at least if we take that to mean ‘entail’) everything which contradicts it. E.g. the negation of ‘This is blue all over’ does not imply ‘This is red all over’, even though the second statement contradicts the first.

RIght. The wording might be a bit awkward. I’m not saying “~X -> all statements consistent with ~X”. That would be inconsistent, because they contradict each other. I’m saying “~X -> at least one statement consistent with ~X”. Disjunction rather than conjunction.

The Charles Murray article is I think the best news in a long time, seeing such a public figure target both government overgrowth and the democratic mindset behind it. He sees how the Crowd is always wrong, and this is gratifying. Strength of idea must prevail over popularity of tangible notion.

His recent book themed on cooperation & monopolies and it is not competition but cooperation that achieves monopoly power. The idea being that competition destroys profits while cooperation allows us the monopolize profits to save for the future.

Do your thing. It will fail. We’ll do ours. Why are you even interested?

Your ethnic loser ressentiment politics has to be massively popular. It’s bizarre you’re paying attention to us at all.

ADDED: You have to understand (I’m sure you do) that we want you to vividly differentiate yourselves from us. Not being you is as critical to our identity as not being any other kind of grievance-crazed communist.

Shitposting on the chans and stalking is simply going to push NRxers even further away from WN because high caliber people–bizarrely enough, I know–are actually repulsed by strange obsessions and ravings.

They didn’t get to Moldbug that way, and they’re certainly not going to exit to WN that way (though you can believe what you like–has it worked, by the way?). If you and your boys focused on producing quality content (not mad rants) instead of counterproductive stalking, you’d have hundreds of smart people to your cause.

The International Community Reply:May 29th, 2015 at 11:05 am

The best argument against white nationalism is white nationalists. It’s practically the only argument — everything else is details.

Signalling matters. Moldbug at least had the sense to write in a higher register than ‘4chan shitpost’.

We’re not all as ethno-nihilistic as our host here; I for one am rather fond of the White race. But I completely agree with admin and Moldbug about the irrelevence of White Nationalism as you guys concieve of it. If the White race and by extension human civilization is going to be saved, it won’t be by whining about genocide and pretending that New England puritans for example will ever by their own accord think of other Whites with anything but contempt.

I was talking to a New England WASP woman today, and let me tell you, they are pretty nationalistic. It’s esoteric, but it’s there; they are openly proud of their own heritage (they really love Harvard and their 200 year old yankee houses), look down on everyone else, and automatically side with the opinions of their own people in politics. Yes they are insane and uncoordinated and are going to wipe themselves out, but its not by lack of instinctive nationalism.

The reason you’re so butthurt is that they consider *you* part of the outgroup. I’m sure you feel just the same as a third worlder looking at the White supremacist border system (to the extent that it still exists); you want in, and they don’t want you in, so you support a gibsmedat pan-White nationalism. Trouble is, they’re not going to fall for it; pan-White nationalism is not going to work.

The other thing that’s not going to work is biting our ankles because we have all the smartest intellectuals (your claim, not mine) as if there is some kind of limited supply of right-wing intellectuals. This speaks to your zero-sum gibsmedat attitude again; where do you think we got all these intellectuals? We converted them from open minded progressives. Do the same.

Here’s what is going to save the White race: saving civilization as a whole by building up enough institutional worthyness to accept power and install a competent rule. The same way the best thing for the worker isn’t the communism he votes for, but the authoritarian capitalism he needs, the best thing for the White man isn’t nationalism, but a well run civilization in which he can thrive, and which will rationally afford him his natural place.

“But I completely agree with admin and Moldbug about the irrelevence of White Nationalism as you guys concieve of it.”

You’re referring to white nationalism as YOU guys conceive of it, as some kind of glorified commie chimpout. Saying white nationalists support communism is disingenuous and lazy. White nationalists favor racial solidarity as a first priority. Economics come later and are open to debate.

What you describe in the WASP woman is not nationalism, but its negation.

“we have all the smartest intellectuals (your claim, not mine)”

False. I’ve claimed no such thing. There is, however, I would admit, a great deal of intellect going to waste in #ZRx. I’d take Weev over Land any day, though.

>You’re referring to white nationalism as YOU guys conceive of it, as some kind of glorified commie chimpout. Saying white nationalists support communism is disingenuous and lazy. White nationalists favor racial solidarity as a first priority. Economics come later and are open to debate.

Ok you didn’t understand what I said, sorry for being unclear. What I am critiquing as gibsmedat and unrealistic is the *concept of pan-White solidarity as a political strategy itself*.

There is a lot of intellectual capital going to waste in a lot of places. Why do you need to bother us, instead of the new york times? If you prefer weev, go hang out with weev. I think he’s a great guy and will probably do some good for the race, but tell him that sending you guys to bother us isn’t helpful.

The International Community Reply:May 29th, 2015 at 11:15 am

The fact that Yankees and Southerners don’t join hands and sing Kumbaya is precisely as antinationalistic as the fact that the Japanese and the Chinese don’t either.

And if you frame nationalism in terms of racial solidarity as the highest virtue, people are going to think this means preferring meth-addled 80-IQ wiggers to Alex Manoogian or Jerry Yang. Good luck swimming against that current.

Are you sure the holocaust was so good for the Jews? Considering it is not 90-IQ useless Mizrahi Jews who perished, but at least 95% of the 5.7 million were Ashkenazim, I’d say a lot of Jewish capital, and I dare say human capital, was lost then. Now you can argue the holocaust established Israel, but that’s just a retarded meme; Israel would have been founded regardless of the holocaust, perhaps a few years later than 1948. The holocaust was by far more dysgenic than eugenic. Not really “good for the Jews”. As for humanity, that’s a tough one. On one hand, humanity rid itself of innumerable subversive Commie parasites; on the other hand, I’d estimate that about 300+ geniuses on par with Einstein were lost. Plus you get flooded with Muslims and your nationalism is illegal. Was it worth it?

The “Holocaust” is grossly exaggerated, to say the least. Watch Jewish revisionist David Cole’s Auschwitz documentary on YouTube. The official count at Auschwitz dropped from 4 million to half that amount, but nobody at any of the state-sponsored “Holocaust” tourist traps ever bothered to change the “six million” total. That number has a kabbalistic significance and was used twenty years earlier in Zionist fundraising, yet we’re expected to believe that Hitler somehow managed – by coincidence? – to murder exactly that many people. Land and other #ZRx types accuse white nationalists of being communists, but themselves hold sacred the Soviet propaganda advanced as evidence at Nuremberg.

How about we just see how it turns out? I’m not partial to one half of it but all things considered NBS & Land’s endorsement is sufficient for me. What matters is the relative result from the POV of right now, and we can only go up.

As long as people aren’t too difficult against the current leads and the community tries to work together we can make something out of it. We should make sure that we are not going to make this thing not work just because we are all difficult people.

I’m going to make the claim that most people who dislike the current coordination leads have not scrubbed their thinking of a utopian mindset, for some reason they are looking for the {best} out of the set of all possible {leads}, when in reality we want {good} out of the set of all relevant leads, and how we measure ‘progress’ is relative to the current position we are in RIGHT NOW.

* Would your {preferred leaders} have agreed to leading?

* Was it logistically feasible considering the actual reality of the situation to have asked everyone relevant?

* Why have you decided already when we are concerned with the results? It’s easy to make something fail, so even if you cannot have it your way do not take the other step and make sure it fails. Come together and make the best of it.

A major point of NRx is to do good with the IMPERFECT situation we have and make the best of it, not foolishly hope we had the permutation of reality of our choice.

I’m sure an election would have selected a different crew for the top, but that’s not our style, is it? If we’re going to be realistic, we needed SOMEONE, and no one else had the combination of actual will, coordinated coherence, sufficient legitimacy, and hard control of key institutions to make it happen.

To be fair, we have not yet fully demonstrated that we are worthy of this thing. The next few weeks will be critical for the legitimacy questions as we demonstrate that we take our position seriously, that we can put in the hard work required to take this thing forward institutionally, and that we can rally the community around Hestia and clear up the remaining uncertainty. I’m pretty confident that we have what it takes, but we’ll have to demonstrate that, and you all shouldn’t take us much more seriously than to give us a chance until we do.

Open thread, so the following is pretty hilarious. Our host’s favorite ‘bio-garbage’ over at aristoi descending into a paranoiac frenzy, beset by CCRU demons on one side and ONA demons on the other, backed by hosts of their possessed:

As far as I can tell, this Land fellow is some kind of capitalism/technology worshipping, rootless, atheist ethno-nihilist. I.e., he sounds like the stereotypical Ashkenazionist from hell to me, who are the scourge of all true reactionaries. Is this an accurate description of this branch of NRx, or am I way off the mark?

The most degraded type of natural-merit deprived Negro: “Dem ebbul magic whites gone stole all dat I and the good black folks wuz owed in life!”
The most degraded type of natural-merit deprived Malay: “Chinese locusts come and take away everything that belong to me, and the other good Muslim sons of the soil!”
The most degraded type of natural-merit deprived White loser: “The evil genius of the scheming Ashkenazim is responsible for all the bad things that have happened to me and my people, and even for all the stupid shit that we’ve done!”

— I’ll assume there has to be a difference of some kind, but it’s damned hard to see.